Among the many traditions instituted under New Labour is the tradition that, when an election is imminent, someone (usually Labour) is caught rigging the vote. It happened in 2002, it happened in 2003, it happened in 2004, it happened in 2005, it happened in 2006, and now it’s happened in 2007. Yesterday’s Sunday Times revealed that Cllr Keith Wakefield, leader of the Labour group on Leeds City Council, knowingly and deliberately broke electoral law.

Last week, an undercover Sunday Times reporter recorded Wakefield and fellow Labour councillor Graham Hyde encouraging Labour-supporting students to knock on voters’ doors, and ask them whether they had filled in their postal vote form. If they had, but had not sent it off, then the students were told to volunteer to post the vote on behalf of the voter. If the voter had not yet completed his or her ballot, the students were instructed to offer to ‘assist’ with this task. So much for the secret ballot.

It is certainly a breach of the Electoral Commission’s code of conduct for an activist to assist a voter in voting, or to volunteer to post the ballot for the voter. It may also be that the Labour Party has been in direct breach of the law, and the Sunday Times has now passed a dossier onto the police for investigation. Hyde appeared to acknowledge this:

Student 4: It’s illegal to collect, isn’t it?

Hyde: Yes it is, but we’ve done 25% already, so…

Ah, the Macbeth defence: "I am in fraudulently completed ballots/ Stepp’d in so far that, should I rig the vote no more/ Returning were as tedious as go o’er". Or as Magnus Magnusson had it: "I’ve started, so I’ll finish".

Also interesting to note is the extent to which all three main parties are alleged to be complicit in breaching electoral rules, in relation to one particular community:

[Wakefield] also told the students about the Asian voting networks — whereby senior figures in the Asian community either collect and fill in postal voting papers or press people to vote a certain way. The Labour candidate in the ward is Asian.

“All the parties use the Muslim connections…while there is paranoia in the country about the use of Asian voting systems… They have a brilliant network: they pass it on; they all want to use the postal,” said Wakefield.

This "paranoia" would probably have something to do with the fact that the overwhelming majority of vote-rigging cases involve Muslims. In these circumstances, the words "they all want to use the postal" are cause for concern, to say the least.

Prior to 2000, you simply couldn’t get a postal vote unless you had a good reason for not being able to vote in person. Then Labour changed the rules, so that you could get a postal vote on demand. The aim was to increase voter participation. And it has certainly worked. Many voters now participate again, and again, and again in the same election. Democracy might be suffering, but participation certainly isn’t!

All rather worrying, isn’t it? Although, I would prefer to think that I live in a country where the government rigs the vote, than that I live in one where the majority would actually choose to vote Labour.

The "Dancing Slags" trial has ended with the conviction of five terrorists, who have been jailed for life. Been about 5 or 6 years since i was one of those ‘dancing slags’ at that particular club but still.. (shudder). Good job by the British security services. No time to comment properly but Harry’s Place are reporting that the judge had this to say:

"You have betrayed this country that has given you every opportunity," said Sir Michael Astill, QC, the judge at the Old Bailey. "All of you may never be released: it is not a foregone conclusion."

and point out that a number of the plotters came from largely non-religious backgrounds, but were inducted into jihadism after coming into contact with Al Muhajiroun and other similar Islamist groups. The BBC notes that a key prosecution witness was former terrorist turned supergrass American Mohammed Babar. And how since February 2004, British counter-terrorism officers began round-the-clock surveillance of the key suspects, including recording bugged conversations. The complete operation demonstrates what’s involved. It included:

To the left, you see Pope Benedict XVI, current pontiff of the Catholic Church (aka: Church of Rome, Anti-Christ, Fish-eaters, and various other nasty and small-minded little slurs). As few of you are likely to know, he wants to reintroduce access to the latin mass to RC (Roman Catholic) churches on a larger scale. Access which shrank dramatically after the bishops conference known as Vatican II. As part of this planned revival, a particular prayer for the Jews would be re-introduced to services, praying that they to whom Christ came first would see the light of salvation. But apparently praying for someone’s salvation is hate speech, so the BBC is Not Happy.

Says the BBC of the old latin mass (also known as the Tridentine Mass):

"The old wording has none of the Vatican Council thinking that reversed long-standing anti-Jewish views in the Church. Vatican II brought about a revolution in Catholic thinking, highlighting the ancient Jewish roots of Christianity and affirming God’s love for the Jews."

Al-Beeb, lover of all things Judaic and Israeli, as we know, spends several long paragraphs quoting people saying that there is not much demand for the Tridentine, that "Any liturgy that presents Jews as being doomed in their faith doesn’t present a very healthy attitude towards Judaism and the Jewish people", etc, etc. No-where is there seen a fair quote or comment that praying for the Jews is a Christian and loving thing. Indeed, al-Beeb goes out of its way to quote someone referring to calls for Jews to convert to Christianity as a noxious and evil thing. Imagine! Calling people to eternal life and salvation! (You can almost hear some BBC top-man muttering to himself in a corner "Wicked, trickssy, Catholicss! We hatess them, Preciouss, we hatess them!")

You can read the whole hatchet-job here. (Or, of course, you could just go back to hoping and praying someone else starts posting here soon so that you won’t have to read more of this kind of thing.)

Courtesy of Little Green Footballs, I find that on last Friday, a group of moslems "demonstrated outside the Paddington Green police station on Friday, but British media completely ignored the event". Possibly because they were masked and carrying messages not peaceful enough to fit the standard MSM stories about the ‘Religion of Peace’ (see here for examples of peacefulness of ‘Religion of Peace’) and thus not worthy of our knowing. Perhaps. There’s really no fathoming the workings of the fevered minds responsible for the MSM, I suppose.

What I would like to know, though, is what the sign ‘Muslims Rise For Islam’ is supposed to mean. You can see the banner quite clearly here, but the meaning is somewhat obscure for this Brit. It looks more than a little like incitement to mob action to me. After all, moslems have the Respect party, so they can use political power if they want to, and they have entire nations kowtowing to them in an unprecedented manner, so they don’t need to use social power. This leaves mob action, which is generally a very unpleasant occurrence.

But it has been suggested that the non-reporting is a good thing, as it deprives these oddballs of the ‘oxygen of publicity’ which they seem to love so much. More interesting than the non-reporting of the event, I think, is the victim mentality of the people involved. We can see from the images (full gallery currently here, taken by Gaiaseye) that the banners display a uniformity of image and message, which suggests that there is someone pulling the strings behind all this. I doubt it’s a single-purpose gathering, this. As well as trying to cow the cops, they are also re-inforcing the imagined victimhood of the moslems in the UK. (I say imagined because there is no other group that I know of for whom things have been pre-emptively banned and satire of whom has been actively discouraged by politicians)

The victimhood ‘meme’, so to speak, for the moslems is getting to interesting levels now, and it appears to be not only moslems who believe it, but also at least one American (hat-tip to regular commentator Bernard for pointing that essay out to me), Oriana Fallaci’s sarcastic term ‘poor-little-things’ to refer to moslems in Europe becomes more and more pertinent.

Following commentators’ comments asking for a more female voice on ATW, perhaps in the hope that a more effeminate voice would moderate our rabidly pro-right, pro-Christian (mostly) view. So we thought about it, and decided that introducing another female blogger would be a good idea. With this in mind, Dee of Righteous Indignation is joining us here at ATW, hopefully to post her first post later today.

Though, being as she’s an Aussie blogger, her ‘later today’ and ours might be a little different. Still, I’m sure the contributions, when they come, will be sufficiently cage-rattling to keep the readership interested, so please do make her welcome as a new member of our ATW crusade/heresy gang.

This is a very interesting article considering under what circumstances and in what way Israel would strike against Iran. Well worth a read. For me, the big issue is the leadership, or lack of it, coming from Israeli PM Osloid Olmert. It is obvious that Israel CANNOT sit back and allow Iran to gain nukes since the crazy Mullahs have made it abundantly clear that they will use these to wipe Israel off the map. The rest of the world, and certainly the internationalist elite in the EU and UN, are preparing to meekly accept a nuke-armed Iranian thugocracy. I don’t believe Israel will take this cowardly approach but Olmert needs kicked out of power since the half-hearted effort we saw last year when Israel failed to smash Iran’s proxies in Hezollah is all this man is capable of doing. It may prove a lethal calculus but the dangers for Israel of a nuke ready Iran are too great to leave alone. Wishing away danger is not the path Israel should follow.

I note that there are now more than four million CCTV cameras in the UK, one for every 14 people, and the national DNA database which was set up by police to combat crime now holds 3.5 million profiles. I also see we now have the use of special listening devices which can be placed in lamp posts, street furniture and offices. More than 300 of the cameras with built-in microphones have been fitted in benefit offices and city centres. The equipment can pick up aggressive tones on the basis of decibel level, pitch and speed at which words are spoken. Westminster council has already started piloting the listening devices, but experts say the use of these microphones raises questions about how surveillance can be used to intrude into the private lives of citizens. How have we come to this pretty pass where we are being watched and listened to wherever we go?

Simple – we have a political class – Labour/Conservative/Liberal – which wants to monitor and control us, to restrict our liberty. We need to rise up and assert our independence and demand our freedoms back. Big Brother may be watching us – but he needs to be given a pair of blackened eyes.

Here is the warning…

"He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother. "

You do not defeat terrorism by rewarding terrorists, regardless of how many bleeding heart liberals argue otherwise. Want to know where that flawed approach leads to? Read UNIONISM DECAYED 1997-2007 - It's my first book and it explains what happens when you seeek to appease terrorists and call it peace. It's available right now for ATW readers so make sure you get your copy by emailing the editor! This is the book that dissents from the herd mentality that doing wrong can lead to being right. It doesn't and this book spells out WHY.

Copyright & copy; 2010 A Tangled Web (All rights reserved).Comments on articles here are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of A Tangled Web or David Vance. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise unacceptable may be deleted by the Editor. However the fact a particular comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by David Vance of the views expressed therein.